Against a four year term

Key and Shearer want 4 year terms of parliament. Why? Efficiency, they reckon. 3 years is ‘too short to govern’. Well, they wouldn’t be the first politicians to argue that less democracy would be more ‘efficient’.

First, addressing the claims that there’s no time to govern in the three year term. It’s bollocks. The Government’s legislative programme stops for only a couple of months in election year.

But why do we need a three year term? In New Zealand, we are unique among democracies in the degree to which power is held by the Government.

We don’t a written, over-riding constitution; we don’t have a supreme court with legislative strike-down powers; we don’t have a second chamber of parliament; nor do we have state or provincial governments. Even local government is being defanged and side-stepped to concentrate power with Cabinet. No other Executive in the democratic world lacks all these checks and balances on its power.

Regular opportunities to vote the bastards out is all we have.

That’s why Kiwis rejected a change to a four year term by a margin of more than two to one when the question was put to us in referenda in 1967 and 1990. That’s why we would reject it again. Indeed, both the public’s adoption to MMP in the 1990s and our strong decision to retain it in 2011 show that we want more controls on the power of government, not less.

If there is a referendum on a four-year term (and woe betide any government that would try to pull that shit without a referendum) it will fail just like the previous attempts.**

(* the other, contradictory, argument you hear is that because the 3 year term is so short and voters are loath to admit a mistake so soon after electing a government, they effectively give governments a ‘free hit’ in their first term. In truth, 2 of our 10 governments in the modern era have been one-termers, same as two-termers and four-termers. And 30% of people change votes between elections – 3 years isn’t too short a time for people to change their minds.)

(** And with both National and Labour having put themselves on the wrong side of public opinion on this, if there is a referendum in 2014 on a four year term, there’s big opportunities for parties that support a three year term.)

Share this:

Related

158 comments on “Against a four year term”

On a significant constitutional point like this, Shearer should have compelling policy reasons, and be able to explain them. Where are they?

And honestly, where was the consultation? Or is it just like the Housing policy; the actual Elected Labour Policy Council doesn’t get a look in, and it’s just the usual suspects making shit up in the office, on the day?

Shearer said that 3 years was too long in opposition, and _may_ be to short in government. That doesn’t sound to me like an enthusiastic endorsement of a lengthening of a term, and I didn’t see that he had mentioned efficiency at all. We do need to be careful not to read too much into sub-editors headlines . . .

The proposal from Key does highlight the general National desire to do away with elections – accompanied by reducing the time for submissions,( or doing away with consultation at all) and their desire to reduce the scope of what local authorities can do in their communities, regardless of teh wishes of those communities. In contrast what Labour governments have tended to do is delegate more decisions to local communities, and embrace consultation (with the messy and slower decision-making that can involve), but as a result making better decisions.

Now Shearer, or any other individual member of Labour or the Green Party or indeed any other party may think a longr term is a good idea for a range of reasons, but we did not hear one from Key or Shearer. What I hope to hear from Labour is that general principle that Labour supports democracy, that they treat it seriously, and that they value consultation and delegation of decisions to local communities where appropriate.

So if at first you see something surprising from Labour or Shearer, it sometimes pays to look more closely – we know Key makes shit up, but in this case it appears to be the news media that was “making shit up” – possibly through not understanding a dry joke. . .

I’m against it, just imagine having to have 4yrs under this blue team,followed by a 4yr term
of light blue ( if elected), 3yrs at least, shortens their grip and voters can have a re-think which is likely to be the best blue team and put in a greater dash of green,to even things up.

The Greens and NZ First (&UF) leaders have said they support a 4 year fixed-term parliament in principle too. But I think all (including Key) have said things about it needing to have cross-party support, needing to take the public along with them etc etc… so if they’re true to their word it’ll be tough to make happen (by taking the public along with them…). If not, it’s easy – they all agree…

I have some sympathy with the counter-intuitive argument that we might be ready to throw out a govt after 4 years, but not after 3 – National dropped considerably in the last year (but the election campaign started that trend…).
But I think James is right – we need more checks and balances on our government – which is why I guess having this as part of the consititutional review (where we can also add checks and balances) makes sense. A fixed term is the first c&b, but having some legislation that is more authoritative – and needs a 2/3rds majority to pass / repeal (eg Bill of Rights etc) – that the supreme court can then strike down other legislation that contradicts it would seem a good idea. I’d also like much stronger, more independent select committees to scrutinise legislation (and less whipping by parties, but I’m not sure how you achieve that…).

I could be convinced, but itw ould take extra checks being added. And that’s not going t happen so they can piss off as far as I’m concerned.

The quid pro quo on offer is the laughable ‘fixed term’. there is sod all advantage in being able to name the election date for starters, and for the main course, proponents argue that MMP coalitions provide a check on the executive. That’s stupid on its face ( coalition partners are a part of the executive), but even if it wasn’t it would mean that the fixed term gets thrown out when the coalition collapses.

No other Executive in the democratic world lacks all these checks and balances on its power…

This.

In conjunction with the continuing loss of democratic freedoms and rights, wherever they were once found, along with the many steps towards NZ becoming a police-state: It is essential that the left has a comprehensive strategy to join the dots on what this means, and for how to repair, restore, and augment the mechanisms that enable democracy.

It’s really ironic, the people who were jumping up and down about lightbulbs nodding approvingly, as the elites gain ever more control over every aspect of our lives, and simultaneously shut down our ability to dissent. We’re a nation of ‘Stepford Wives’ (and husbands) when it comes to the freedoms that really matter.

As far as I’m concerned, the polys can have their four years as soon as they’ve implemented democracy

Elitists feel in their gut they are best qualified to govern. The public are fickle, uninformed.

Democrats trust the public to decide because:

1. The entire public has a more balanced perspective than a few MPs.
2. The public must live with the consequences so they should decide.
3. Decisions made in referendums cannot be tinkered with by future parliaments.
4. The public is much more capable of reversing a referendum decision if it is wrong. Representatives never admit mistakes for fear of losing face.

I have NEVER met a top Labour MP who had anything except scorn for binding referendums.

Lange, Clark, Shearer, Robertson, Cunliffe. ALL have told ME personally a wider use of binding referendums is a stupid idea.

In reality most past referendums have attempted to take guidance on a complex issue from a simplistic yes/no response to a misleading question . The most appalling may well have been the “pro-smacking” referendum where either a yes or no response could be argued as supporting whatever view any individual held.

Your world view may be different of course – for example you may well believe that the purpose of The Standard is to find any excuse to attack Labour, and by omission, tacitly support National – I suspect most posters and readers are a little more balanced. Democracy has not been well served by referendums in this country, but it has been even less well served by the blatantly anti-democratic stance of National and National-led governments.

All of which takes us away from discussion of a possible 4 year term – but then the idea was only floated as a distraction from falling employment / increasing poverty / a lack of economic ideas or competence, wasn’t it?

What we really need is to able to hold the MPs to account and we can’t presently do that.

We need to be able to not just kick them out of parliament but to throw them in jail when they do things that are detrimental to NZ, such as selling state assets. To have such actions seen as what they are – treason.

We also need to be able to ensure that the will of the people governs and not the will of the corporates and the business lobby. That means binding referendums held for major policy shifts. The lawyers and politicians would still write the policies but we would determine what the policy is.

And, yes, I think we need a written constitution.

Neither Labour nor National will ever countenance such things and will go on about mob rule if ever they were mentioned.

“We need to be able to not just kick them out of parliament but to throw them in jail when they do things that are detrimental to NZ, such as selling state assets. To have such actions seen as what they are – treason.”

If an party won an outright majority, say 55%, on a campaign based on the idea of asset sales then how can you say it is treason if democratically elected on the basis of that particular policy?

Not to mention that all policy is going to be detrimental to someone. You can’t please everyone all the time.

If an party won an outright majority, say 55%, on a campaign based on the idea of asset sales then how can you say it is treason if democratically elected on the basis of that particular policy?

I can say that it’s treason because the facts show that selling state assets is detrimental to NZ. I thought that was obvious. What I’m asking for is that such policies then be put to referendum. This government got elected with selling state assets as policy but the majority of people are against it and if it went to referendum it wouldn’t pass. Just because a government got elected with such a policy doesn’t mean that the majority of people want that policy.

I am asking you a hypothetical Draco – if a govt. got a majority and polling indicated a majority supported sales (more than a margin of error) then you can’t call it treason (you can personally if you wish). The people voted for it and the people support it.

Secondly what if you were elected and you implemented a policy which actually turned out to be very detrimental to the nation, would you then submit to being thrown in jail?

I am asking you a hypothetical Draco – if a govt. got a majority and polling indicated a majority (more than a margin of error) then you can’t call it treason (you can personally if you wish). The people voted for it and the people support it.

Then they’d still support it in a referendum wouldn’t they and thus the government would be doing what they were told and so couldn’t be held accountable.

Secondly what if you were elected and you implemented a policy which actually turned out to be very detrimental to the nation, would you then submit to being thrown in jail?

Comes back to those pesky facts again. If the facts had indicated (we don’t know everything) that that policy would be good and not detrimental then it couldn’t be considered treason. It’s only when they do something that has already been proved detrimental that treason applies.

Besides, If I was elected I’d immediately look to implement the above policies of accountability and so it would have gone to referendum.

So the government goes “If elected we plan to put Bill x, x and x to referendum” whereas the other party says “Vote for us and we’ll put bills y, y and y to vote” and then whomever wins gets to out there bills to vote.

Yep. Remember, there’s still the crafting of laws and the everyday running of the country to do and I’m sure that the people want a choice in who does that. They just may have some consideration as to who they trust the most to be in those positions of power.

While I agree that a govt needs to be able to implement policy that it is elected on, there are limits. It would not be OK for a govt to say confiscate peoples shares without compensation, or effectively suspending free speech by nationalising all radio stations, even if that was a policy. That is why the rule of law and a Bill of rights is essential to protect our rights against govt.

Now of course part privitsation of SOE’s is not in the same category, since the rights of induividual citizens are not affected. Neither their liberty or their property are affected by such a policy. However we will have to wait to see what the Supreme Court says about iwi (a category of private rights) interests in water in relation to the policy.

I agree but for tactical reasons I have of late been arguing for “veto referendums.” If parliament passes a bill we can have a referendum to veto it.

We in NZ have been culturally brainwashed into a deep distrust of our fellow citizens. Time and again someone will say how stupid the government is. I reply with a suggestion of referendums. They pull back in revulsion as if I am inviting the Barbarians to take over Rome.

Yes, as I just said in reply to Draco, we have been acculturated to blind obedience to the elite.

Our NZ/English culture has not had a violent revolution which overturned aristocratic autocracy.

Modern French governments get very nervous when there is a mass street demonstration in Paris. It may have been 220 years ago, but in their guts they remember street demonstrations started the French revolution.

Yep when a major employer goes belly up taking the livelihood of at least hundreds of workers down with it,(more than a few of whom will lose their homes), having not a clue about what to say or do about such a dire situation the fall back position is to have a ‘distraction’,

Enter stage right Slippery the Prime Minister dragging with Him the big red herring of a 4 year Parliamentary term,

It aint going to happen as Slippery knows He just spun that line because the trail of destruction being exhibited in the Depression Economy which His mate Bill from Dipton is running just began to seriously bite the arse of the middle class…

Actually the arguments for 4 years are reasonably strong, and relate primarily to the impact of MMP. The last two referenda were held under FPP. In 1990 there had been recent experience of the Govt acting beyond its mandate.

Under MMP the process of government is more drawn out. Pretty much everything is subject to negotiation by the coalition partners. The Select Committee process is much more robust, which extends the time legislation takes. Of course Select Committees don’t make govt policy, so they do not veteo govt, as some here seem to expect.

Based on my experience it seems that it now takes 4 years to do what used to take 3 under FPP. While in most respects that is actually a good thing (more critical examination of govt policy), it also means a 4 year term makes sense.

As an example, compare how easy full privitisation was under FPP, compared to the lengthy process of the Mixed Ownerdship model where only 49% is intended for sale. Now I know this site wants delay on this issue, but there will bound to be a key policy of a future Labour/Green govt that will be subject to a similiar delay, which will have commenters on this site being very frustrated.

One of the results of a 4 year term is that Govts would routinely have two terms rather than the current three terms, which has been the most common situation for the last 70 years. I think that would be a good thing, and produce a better govt. The last term of three term govts is usually pretty dismal; think of Muldoon 1981 – 1984, Bolger Shipley 1996 – 1999 and Clark 2005 – 2008. In contrast think of the energy that the Obama administration is bringing to its second term. Of course he is term limited, which is not the parliamentary model.

You just cannot assess the merits of this issue by what you think of the Key government. One does have to recall that the people actually expect a government to govern according to its mandate, and by and large that is what the Key government has done. Your turn will come, and you will expect to be able to govern.

An extension of the term should not be linked with having a supreme constitution, giving an unelected Supreme Court strike down powers. That is not part of a parliamentary democracy, and does not feature in comparable jurisdictions. In any event the courts have progressively become more influential, as can be seen with Bill of Rights decisions and “principles of the treaty” decisions.

However, I do think we could have a modernised and more complete Constitution Act to repalce the 1986 Act. Such an Act would cover all the fundamentals of the constitution, and would be more accesible than the current act. It would also have a Preamble that covered our most important values. I will be making a full submission on this to the Constitution Review Committee.

Key & Co. destroyed local government in Auckland and Christchurch. They had no mandate to jam a Super City down our throats? Never whispered a word about it in the election campaign.

And removed the requirement of a referendum so that they could ram down our throats as well. This is the type of action that should have had every MP that voted to remove that referendum in jail for a minimum of 20 years.

Most humourous. Shame it delivered a non-new-zealand-lawyery response. But ten out of ten for being a dick (again).

Treason falls under the Crimes Act 1961:

73 Treason
Every one owing allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen in right of New Zealand commits treason who, within or outside New Zealand,—
(a)kills or wounds or does grievous bodily harm to Her Majesty the Queen, or imprisons or restrains her; or
(b)levies war against New Zealand; or
(c)assists an enemy at war with New Zealand, or any armed forces against which New Zealand forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between New Zealand and any other country; or
(d)incites or assists any person with force to invade New Zealand; or
(e)uses force for the purpose of overthrowing the Government of New Zealand; or
(f)conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in this section.

And to answer your question: none of it. Which is why they aren’t in gaol for treason.

Although your little google thing showed a variety of “treason”definitions around the world, and some of the broader ones along the lines of “damage to the safety or security of the state” could conceivably include things like aiding a rush on the dollar or conspiring to privatise assets. Bit of a legal loophole there, in my opinion. Not one I’d expect pollies to fix any time soon, though.

As an example, compare how easy full privitisation was under FPP, compared to the lengthy process of the Mixed Ownerdship model where only 49% is intended for sale. Now I know this site wants delay on this issue, but there will bound to be a key policy of a future Labour/Green govt that will be subject to a similiar delay, which will have commenters on this site being very frustrated.

I’m sure there would be such commentators but I’m also sure that slowing down legislation is far better than speeding it up which is what you seem to be arguing for.

On the one hand you say that government’s need more time to get things done, and on the other hand that a 4 year term will force them to be more energetic because they will only get 8 years instead of 9.

And the MOM policy wasn’t held up because of ‘MMP’, but due to court cases. The original idea was to have them all done and dusted in a roughly two year window.

Yes it will lead to 8 years rather than 9, but the two terms will mean a better govt for the 8 years, rather than the usually wasted and divisive third term.

It does look likely that we are going to get a referendum on the issue in the 2014 election. If it passes it would presumably affect the 2017 election, so the next election would be 2021, rather than 2020.

My view on why two 4 years is better is because most three term govts seem to be able to manage two good terms; sufficiently so that they get relected for a third term. But a four term govt is rare, so clearly most voters are not impressed with the third term. In fact the result is usually quite decisive.

In the last two govts, the Opposition actually went backwards in the second election; the Nats in 2002, and Labour in 2011. So the voters obviously thought the Govt of the day was doing something right. The second election is very much an assessement of how well the Govt has done, rather than an assessment of the Opposition, who is not usually thought to be a credible option anyway, unless the Govt has been a real disaster.

I appreciate that the above is really an electoral assessment, rather than an analytical evaluation of the quality of govt.

In this regard I would say that most governments have a six year view. They have an agenda, which they know will take more than 3 years to implement and deliver. They also know they absolutely must have been seen to deliver within two terms, since by the second term voters will essentially decide whether you have suceeded or not. They will have very little interest in a govt that keeps saying the problems present after 6 years in government were caused by the previous govt.

Few govts in NZ have a 9 year plan, even though it might make sense to have one. The third term is just too conjectural when first elected to be able to have such a view. But two terms are not. In fact one plans at the outset on getting two terms.

So I consider that two terms leading to an eight year plan would lead to better long term govt. For instance a creative Innovation agenda will take 8 years to implement. The Callaghan Institute would have started in 2011 had it not been for the Christchurch earthquakes. Instead it is starting in 2013. It will be barely off the ground by 2014. Even if it had started in 2011, the new facilities would have taken till 2014 to be built and to deliver even the first results.

To start with, I agree that governments will have a plan for two terms. But I also think that by the time of the second term they will be thinking about the third. Basically, I think they plan for the next term as well as the one they are in. Consequently, I don’t think changing the length of the term will have much effect.

I think that governments have often lost popularity in the third term due to the fact the opposition will have got their shit together, and have a coherent message to sell that is in response to the what the government has been doing. Combine that with the fact that the government has been in long enough that they can’t blame their predecessors, and the third term becomes a defensive nightmare.

A lot of the things that take a long time to do, actually finished by a different government than the one that started them. If it is a popular thing, the opposition will usually be swallowing it as a dead rat and pledging not to change it, but even more often there is consensus between L and N, except for at the margins.

Consider a really radical Government elected, say, to make sweeping changes to our existing well-embeded capitalist system. Three years would be far too short for that, and if it jumped in feet-first with sweeping legislative changes in its first year the deep societal shifts resulting would still be underway when year three comes around with perhaps a spooked electorate voting for a return to the status quo ante.

We might think that a good thing if it was a Right-wing agenda being imposed, but I would argue that from where we are now it would take longer to move the nation to the left while retaining popular public support. Don’t forget the damage Douglas caused in less than three-years, before Lange called for a cup of tea.

Why do we even have General Elections? They bring the country to a standstill for months, saturate us with political snake-speak and baby-kissing but mean the politicians can ignore us all the rest of the time. And they often result in major policy shifts that are only just working themselves out when it all changes again. Why not divide the country into, say, 20 constituences each with 5 MPs one of which has to stand for election on a five-year cycle, so that every year there are 20 elections covering one-fifth of Parliament. The Government would have to govern on the basis of an annual approval.

true…the ACT Party would love this.
Say hello to their one law for all racist bullshit.
Say goodbye to Maori culture.
Say hello to corporations funding referendums – we’d be fracking within a month.
Say hello to the bigotted, but determined minorities suppressing the human rights of other minorities.
Say hello to money becoming even more powerful in shaping and pushing through policies.

Yeah, my main reason for not wanting binding referenda are civil liberties. It’s a nightmare. One shocking crime and we’d have the death penalty back on the books, till we execute some poor fucker repeal it, rinse , repeat.

National claim they have a mandate for the sales. The referendum will prove they don’t. They then risk alienating the voting public going into the next election if they carry on flogging them off. And the next election comes down to a few percentage movement away from national to the left.

BTW, signatures are still needed for the referendum. Please help get as many as possible before it closes off. Cheers.

Haven’t National said that they would ignore the results of the referendum? NZ has a history of politicians ramming through unpopular decisions, Rogernomics, Ruthanasia etc, John Key probably woudn’t be wrong to think he could get away with the asset sales in spite of their unpopularity. I personally think that the more likely reason he wouldn’t proceed would be if Rio Tinto pulls out of NZ, which would seriously effect the sale price of power companies.

National claim they have a mandate for the sales. The referendum will prove they don’t. They then risk alienating the voting public going into the next election if they carry on flogging them off. And the next election comes down to a few percentage movement away from national to the left.

And yet our state assets end up being sold making us poorer.

Haven’t National said that they would ignore the results of the referendum?

Don’t know if they’ve said that outright but, as the referendum isn’t binding and National are there to sell out NZ, then they will definitely sell our assets.

I’d like to hear an argument against mob rule too.
Sociology and psychology have covered the effects of the crowd, populism, moral panics, social movements, lobbyists etc extensively throughout the 20th Century. I am not familiar with the opposing argument

Interesting – I hadn’t heard of it, just found a TV movie of it made in 1981, will watch that now.

In addition to that extreme, but possible example, I would say that our last referendum was disturbing enough. We had a repulsive lobby group – family first – who distorted the issue of child abuse for 2 reasons. One was to protect their right to smack children (Jesus must be proud), the other reason was to get Labour out of government.
They manufactured a moral panic by framing the debate as an issue of freedom vs government control, and they did it so well that it was impossible to bring logic into the argument.
That referendum was an extreme lobby group using fear for their redneck desires. They did it easily. That would become the norm if we moved to regular referendums

So the argument is based on the assumption that the general populace is too ignorant to make reasonable choices and can be easily swayed by media manipulation?

No, “ignorant” is a judgement call. I wouldn’t use that word, I would say the general populace can be seduced. See the 2008 and 2012 election as proof of that. How else would you explain John Key’s popularity?

Its not so much media manipulation, but more manipulation by some people who have the ability to use the media as the vehicle for their message.

Whipping up a crowd against a minority isn’t exactly an uncommon tactic.

Example:

When the court ruled that iwi had a claim to be heard with regard to the foreshore and seabed, within 6 months the mainstream liberal position was the Foreshore and seabed act. I suspect that if it was going to a referendum we would have seen something far closer to Brash’s position, ie, flat out nationalisation. And who’s to say that’s all there would have been on the ballot. Maori seats? Principles of the treaty of Waitangi being excised from legislation?

The idea that when an event happens everyone will calmly and soberly view things is kumbaya wishful thinking.

I’m not disagreeing with the assumption I just wanted to clarify what your position is.
I think you guys have a point about mob rule etc but i still think there must be something better than the present system as it stands.
Out of interest, has anyone ever conducted a survey of NZ’ers to see if they would support the death penalty?

but i still think there must be something better than the present system as it stands.

For sure…I’m not defending our current system, I think its wrong in so many areas and I want change!

Also, if the population is capable of being manipulated, is this a problem that can be addressed with education?

Yes, I think that can work and it should be seen as part of the solution. But that just isn’t the case right now and that is why I think referendums are not the answer.
Most people are not educated on how our economic, social and political ideologies impact on society. That is not to say that people are stupid, greedy or ignorant…its just that people live their lives without being able to, or wanting to learn about them. If everyone was as educated about politics and inequality as most of us here, then referendums could be the best way of organising ourselves politically, but that would take education and a media that is not driven by advertising and profits (as you point out).

Just to clarify another point that AmaKiwi made above. I do not “distrust” my fellow citizens. I trust them to be nice to me, I trust them not to be violent, I trust that they would treat me with compassion and care. However, within today’s society, I do not trust my fellow citizens to be able to understand and explain the complex cause and effect of social & economic policies. I also don’t trust them to understand how our colonial history continues to shape our current race relations. I don’t trust that my fellow citizens understand the complexity of society when I look at our TV, newspapers and general chat around the water cooler.

I trust them as people, I do not trust their knowledge. I hope people don’t trust my knowledge of car engines.

So what’s your solution to problems like asset sales? How do you stop things like that without binding referendums?

Without descending into my usual Labour are shite rant (which is a real problem), I would say it is political education and involvement. But that is not going to change much in a hurry. We are moving further towards a depoliticised society all the time.

I think its got to be education, but there also has to be an opportunity for people to feel as though they are being represented. I know we have the baby-boomer buldge and therefore they will dominate politics, and policies will generally benefit them, but we have to make politics more representative. We can’t expect young people to become politically active when they have no voice. We can’t expect democracy to work when people are excluded.

How do you stop things like that without binding referendums?

The assets are gone as far as I’m concerned, that happened after the 2011 election. I wish NZ didn’t vote that way, I can’t believe NZ would vote the Nats and then complain about every policy they bring in. Binding referendums could stop the asset sales, but then if we had binding referendums, our children would be the only people in society that could be legally subjected to physical pain as a means of control. All the problems that we have with our current political system will not be fixed with binding referendums, instead it will just become streamlined and more destructive.

I’d prefer to see civics classes in schools, heavy restrictions on election spending (so each party has the same amount of money to spend), no debates on TV, no putting up signs prior to elections…try to make it more policy-centric and stop this subconscious marketing.
Next time Labour are in they need to sort out broadcasting. Perhaps sell of all TVNZ shite and reduce it to two channels of advertising free TV. TV1 & TV 2 are not worth keeping at the moment. The tories won that battle, its full of shit and fosters stupidity, sell it and start again. Just don’t do that PPP rubbish again.

“I think its got to be education”
“I would say it is political education and involvement”

That’s all well and good – I think education is the most important thing – however John Key IS educated. And well educated.
The most influential thinkers of the neo-liberal movement have education that’d turn your lights out.

They are well versed in Marxism, Neo-Conservatism, Liberalism, Anarchism, Communism, Third Way, Christianity and Buddhism – just to name a few.
They choose their beliefs based upon their education and political involvement.

@fatty…but then if we had binding referendums, our children would be the only people in society that could be legally subjected to physical pain as a means of control. All the problems that we have with our current political system will not be fixed with binding referendums, instead it will just become streamlined and more destructive.

@ Geoff Can yo explain what you mean by this a bit more?
Sure, the part about the smacking law is the flip side of relying on referendums. Referendums would probably stop asset sales, but they would also be open to lobby groups perverting arguments to push through questionable policies.

This comment relates to where power sits and who oppresses us – All the problems that we have with our current political system will not be fixed with binding referendums, instead it will just become streamlined and more destructive.

I think using binding referendums will end up handing more power to those that oppress us. This is in contrast to the view put forward by AmaKiwi. I don’t mean to put words into AmaKiwi’s mouth, but I see AmaKiwi’s view stemming from the belief that politicians cannot be trusted and they control us. This is a Libertarian kind of view that sees Government as the problem.
I differ. I see those with money as the problem because it is them that steer the Government. If we take reduce the Government’s power, we are not addressing the source of our oppression. Corporations, businesses and lobbyists will be freed to create social movements that have the opportunity to create change far quicker.
I think that is the difference…do we see politicians as those with control and power, or do we see corporations, big businesses and those with money as our oppressors?
I am not defending our politicians, but I see them as puppets, not the puppet masters. If we limit the power of our puppets through referendums, then we are streamlining the puppet master’s power and influence.
Social movements can be created by corporations and become very powerful. The Tea Party Movement is the USA was seen by many as a grassroots movement, but it was a corporate driven movement for smaller Government.
Reducing Government through referendums means that our true oppressors can seduce us even easier.

Yes. Once Corporatocracy is gone then referendums could be useful. However, it is not only corporations and the rich that would benefit from referendums. It is also lobby groups and think tanks that will abuse a binding referendum system.
How do you think family first would use binding referendums?
Also, Colin Craig’s Conservative Party pushes for binding referendums. If we introduced binding referendums, then we are handing more power to people like Colin Craig. Our referendums will not depend on the quality of the policy, instead it will depend on who can frame the issue by drawing on simplistic arguments that use terms like “freedom”, “Kiwi”, “family”, “values” etc.
The right wingers will destroy us when that kind of rhetoric is given more power.
How would policy aimed at beneficiaries get voted on by the public in a referendum? The victims of our economic system are hated on by the majority in our society.

“I think its got to be education”
“I would say it is political education and involvement”

I think there’s more to it than that. I think that there’s habit to be taken into account as well. As long as we keep people from exercising governance then they won’t get into the habit of governance and thus we will get bad decisions from referendums but, IMO, that can be changed through education and practice.

They are well versed in Marxism, Neo-Conservatism, Liberalism, Anarchism, Communism, Third Way, Christianity and Buddhism – just to name a few.

Doubt it. All they really need to know is what’s best for them and then they go out and get it usually through lying.

Draco has a point about practice. If a system isn’t given a chance then you’ll never know. It’s a bit like the argument about the Green party should know its place and not grow too fast because it wouldn’t be able to handle it. It’s the kind of argument you’d expect from those trying to protect the status quo.

Government website says John Key has a bachelor in commerce.
What else has he got that makes him so well educated?

The most influential thinkers of the neo-liberal movement have education that’d turn your lights out.

Really? Who are these wunderkinds?

They are well versed in Marxism, Neo-Conservatism, Liberalism, Anarchism, Communism, Third Way, Christianity and Buddhism – just to name a few.
They choose their beliefs based upon their education and political involvement.

They sound like amazing, how did they manage to throw their lot in with such a load of bunkum?

“It wouldn’t take much for a strong-man politician to whip up a frenzy in the voting base, a knee-jerk public, in order to pass a binding referendum. ”

Yup. It’s a distinct possibility, Contrarian. Worst case scenario; a gruesome murder and/or child abuse case leading to death one month out from a general election and *bingo!* a ready-made panic-driven issue for at least one populist politician that we’re all aware off. 🙁

Gawd help us.

When it comes to binding referenda, do we really want scenarios where the rights of minorities are decided by the Majority? To me that’s not democracy – more like a Fair-ground distorted-mirror verson of democracy.

With Referenda, I’ve no problem with the current system; it’s indicative and if it passes, it gives our elected representatives a bit of guidance – but without tying their hands to something we might regret later… (For example : state asset sales. Key sez he has a mandate from the 2011 election. But if the Referenda gives a resounding ‘No’ to asset sales – whilst his hands are not tied, his moral position is no longer tenable. So he has to then explain his position to the public.)

Personally, my thoughts on these complex issues is a mix of teaching civics in schools; a good public TV broadcaster that shows intelligent current-affairs programmes that challenges our thinking; and a society that takes an interest in current affairs.

That’s much harder than binding referenda – but hopefully we’ll get better results?

I have only heard a little about the Swiss are their referendums, they sound good, but how well does that relate to here? I often hear similar noises about the social democratic ideals of Nordic countries, but that is just not possible for us with our colonial history.
A system that works in a mono-cultured country could prove to be disastrous here.
Many of the great democratic ways of doing things in Northen European countries have been successful, but they are not replaceable here, especially while we’re so politically uneducated.

They have 4 official languages: 64% German, 20% French, 7% Italian, 0.5% Romansh (similar to the ancient Latin used in the Roman Empire).

Most cantons (states or provinces) have one of these as its official language. Several have two. Fribourg/Freiburg has both French and German as its official languages. (It even writes its name in both French and German!) In areas of the southeast there are also bilingual communes (townships). Some are bilingually Italian and Romansh. Some are Romansh and German). In such places all official business and sign posting will be in both languages . . . ALWAYS.

Religiously, the Swiss are almost evenly split between Roman Catholic and Protestant, but religion does NOT correspond to language. Many of the French speakers were French Protestants driven out during the French revolution.

Mob rule! In 600 years of Swiss history no canton has ever asked to leave.

In 1847, they had what is jokingly called “the Swiss civil war.” It lasted 26 DAYS and resulted in fewer than 100 casualties.

In those 600 years there were repeated devastating wars between Germany, France, and Italy. The Swiss NEVER participated. They always remained neutral. Politicians can drag us into wars, but given a referendum the citizens are not stupid enough to send their sons and husbands overseas to fight for someone else’s lunacy.

True, but almost all countries are multicultural these days. When I said mono-cultured, I didn’t mean they are all white, all the same religion and all speak the same language.
I mean that they subscribe to a mono-cultured political ideology…in comparison New Zealand is a bicultural country, and our biculturalism has been a tinderbox for years. It could go up in flames at any minute (eg 2005 election)…I think binding referendums would be a dangerous spark.

Interesting that you think our biculturalism is a tinderbox. My perception is more the opposite, that there is increasing tolerance and respect. My perception could be wrong of course, first time for everything 😛

In many ways biculturalism has, but I was surprised with the 2005 election. In 2003/04 I would never have predicted that we’d come so close to Don Brash’s one nation rhetoric. When the economy going nowhere, people look for others to blame and racism is an easy target.
The problem for Maori is that things can quickly escalate the way it has for beneficiaries since 2010. Maori could wake up one day and see all other oppressed groups pointing the finger at them.
Remember how repulsive and unvotable Don Brash is, he almost pulled it off. And, that was alongside Brash’s crazy economic policies that would have dragged us back into the 90s.

I sit in the middle on this 3 vs 4 year term argument and am ready to be convinced either way.
I have read through the arguments and have to say they are pretty unconvincing on both sides. I really don’t know. I am leaning towards 4 years.
The argument to keep it at 3 years appears to be limited to a Libertarian driven perspective which claims that MP’s are self-serving dickheads, so lets not give them more time than we need to
Although I agree with that to a degree, I think having elections every 3 years exasperates a major problem with our democracy – policies are designed for short term gain and with the goal of making parties/MPs look good for the next election.

Is it just me, or would a 4 year term help to curb the problem that 3 year terms create?

…and what’s up with Scott’s post? His reference to North Korea is painful to read, even by his standards

There appears to be quite a lot of support for binding referendums as a way of increasing democracy among posters here.

Binding referendums might work to increase democracy if we had a functioning democracy where people were accustomed to participating in the decisions that effect their everyday life and did so after examining accurate information and carefully considering the issue in question from the point of view of themselves as an individual, others who might be affected, and society as a whole.

That is not the situation at the moment and I suspect we would end up with the most repulsive type of tyranny of the majority if we used them any more frequently than we do.

Another concern about binding refs is that, counter-intuitively, they reduce accountability.

Everyone gets a say in the privacy of the ballot box, and I don’t see any proponents of the idea saying that how they vote should be public knowledge, made available on a searchable data base.

And yet I suspect that people would be rightly aghast at the idea that mps’ parliamentary votes should be secret.

‘People go mad in crowds, and they come to their sense but slowly, and one at a time.’

Don’t know who said that off hand, but they were a clever bastard. Representative democracy provides a check on that madness. You can hide in a crowd, but you shouldn’t be able to hide in a parliament.

Nicely put, Lefty. I don’t want us to have the right to beat our children or the return of the gallows, but, if put to a binding referendum a lot of kiwis would be pretty keen to take us back to last century.

True enough, but the risk remains. And we should expect Parliament to take the lead on some issues; it’s what we pay them for. The removal of S59 defences to child abuse was clearly legislated in advance of public opinion. If it went to a referendum in 2007, the result may not have been too flash for the young ‘uns.

It would have been our job to sell it to the voters. That’s democracy. Convince people to vote with you.

If the USA had referendums, all this b.s. about things like outlawing abortion and no gun control would be mute. The VAST majority of Americans approve of abortion AND want reasonable restrictions on gun ownership.

Americans aren’t stupid. They just have the best political system money can buy and a handful have tons of money to buy it. (The NRA was founded by the weapons manufacturers. Thank God we don’t make guns in NZ.)

“Binding referendums might work to increase democracy if we had a functioning democracy where people were accustomed to participating in the decisions that effect their everyday life.”

I often think the politically silent are the smart people and we on TS are the fools. They KNOW they have no say. We delude ourselves into thinking our words will make a difference to whatever gang of dictators run parliament this time around.

If people can have an impact on government decisions, they will speak.

Regretfully I agree with lefty. There is a strong moral obligation on Governments to protect minorities from the prejudice of majorities, and even to show some moral leadership at the cost of unpopularity. Governments can be good and bad at it as they are with everything else, but binding referendums would remove even that fig-leaf.

I suspect a binding referendum as to whether smoking should be banned in public places would have been lost to smokers, the legalisation of prostitution would likely never have happened. What do you think the result would have been on a binding referendum as to whether Maori should be given/have returned to them ownership of the beaches and sea-bed?

Why do you have so little faith in your neighbors? Are your neighbors fools? When you disagree with them, are they open to reasoning? Can you not put forward persuasive arguments to win many of them over?

Why do you have so little faith in your neighbors? Are your neighbors fools?

I have little faith in the political logic of my neighbours…when it comes to deciding how social & economic policies will affect us, my neighbours can be fooled, but I wouldn’t call them fools.
Do you call all the people who voted for National in 2008 & 2011 fools?

When you disagree with them, are they open to reasoning? Can you not put forward persuasive arguments to win many of them over?

Sure, they are open to reasoning, but my arguments will not win many of them over in the face of a seductive leader and the power of advertising. Take the anti-smacking referendum as an example, I spoke to many people about that prior to the vote and almost all viewed it as a parental freedom issue, not a child welfare issue.
I couldn’t put forward a persuasive argument in the face of misinformation that was designed to create fear.

AmaKiwi, my neighbors don’t need to be fools to not understand issues that don’t effect them, and that they don’t think effect anyone they know. Many people will bias their vote against any change in those circumstances, and that sort of bias is unacceptable when we’re talking about other people’s rights.

While it’s great when we can win popular votes on rights, it should never be regarded as the only acceptable way to be granted them. The courts, parliament, and civil disobedience are all equally valid ways to claim rights that amount to decent and fair treatment in society, and shouldn’t be undermined by referendum. I wouldn’t want your rights to be gambled like that, and mine shouldn’t be either.

“The courts, parliament, and civil disobedience are all equally valid ways to claim rights that amount to decent and fair treatment in society, and shouldn’t be undermined by referendum. I wouldn’t want your rights to be gambled like that, and mine shouldn’t be either.”

Well they have been doing a shit job of it!

Name one country with referendums that ever became a totalitarian dictatorship.

I suspect a binding referendum as to whether smoking should be banned in public places would have been lost to smokers, the legalisation of prostitution would likely never have happened. What do you think the result would have been on a binding referendum as to whether Maori should be given/have returned to them ownership of the beaches and sea-bed?

Want to know why I’m not concerned about that? Because, over time, people will become aware of the injustices that exist and further referendums will correct for them.

In fact, one of the problems I see with top down governance is that people fail to learn the lessons that they need to because they can say that it wasn’t their fault, that it was the government that did it.

Some years ago the good citizens of Zurich, Switzerland, voted to try an experiment. They would allow hard drugs in a small park near the main railway station. Very enlightened of them. Addiction is an illness, not a crime.

Guess what? Almost from Day One “needle park” was a disaster area. Druggies poured in from all over Europe. Crimes, overdoses, you name it.

The enlightened citizens promptly did a U-turn (via referendum). How long would it have taken city council politicians to admit they had made a mistake? How about all those city payrolled addiction experts lobbying to keep their jobs . . . “The social experiment needs more time.”

Nope. Collect signatures. Vote. Needle park was here and gone in a matter of months.

A four year term could work if the voters had a mechanism to recall underperforming MPs, or those who blatantly broke their campaign promises. Even a three year term would work better whit such a mechanism. Democracy has to be more than “We’ll let this party do what it likes for three/four years” and then elect a different one to do the same thing.

1. Funding. As a public debatre ensues regarding a referendum-topic, would there be controls of how much funding each side (Pro and Anti) could use to promote their positions? How would funding controls relate to things like blogs, letters to editor, newspaper op-eds, etc?

Or would it be open slather and if an referendum impinged on commercial issues, would the party with most bucks get biggest publicity bang? (I understandf there are laws already in place, but I suspect that legislation would be stretched to maximum degree as vested interests saw the power of referensa.)

2. Are we, as activists prepared to campaign – on a regular basis – on referenda that carry heavily political implications and devote more time than we already do? In effect, it would be like campaigning on an annual (or more frequent) basis such as we do for election campaigns?

I’m thinking that burn-out would take a heavy toll after a while?

3. Is it fair for the Majority to vote on rights for Minorities? How do we protect the interests of minorities?

Or do we just accept the Will of the Majority to give/remove rights according to each referendum?

And what if the voter turn-out is small (bad weather, disinterest, voter burn-out, etc), but a majority of that small number still vote to deny a Minority certain rights?

4. Does having binding referenda improve the public’s knowledge of political, social, environmental, economic, issues? Or is it a lazy way out when all that’s required is a tick in a “Yes” or “No” box?

5. How long does a binding referenda bind us? Until the next referenda?

6. What would be the effect of binding referenda on emotion-laden and often prejudice-driven issues such as social welfare? Could we live with a result, say, that limited welfare to recipients for only one year (as the Right would love to have)? See Point #3 above.

In times of extreme economic/social stress – such as the current GFC and Recession – how do we protect the rights of victims of recessionary fallout from calls to limit welfare assistance?

7. If the majority voted to do away with the Treaty of Waitangi – where does that leave Maori? Race relations? Treaty claims?

8. What is the likelihood that politicians could (would) use binding referenda to drive through certain agenda that otherwise they might be reluctant to do personally. But if worded in a certain way, and with sufficient propaganda/media spin, could be left to the public to vote in a particular way?

9. How are complex issues resolved with a simple “Yay” or “Nay” vote. (Eg; Norm Withers referendum question. See below.)

10. How do we choose the wording of a referendum question that prevents emotion-laden terms being used that panders to prejudice and base-emotions?

These are just a few of the practical things we need to consider when going down the binding referenda road.

In case anyone thinks I’m being alarmist, it might be worthwhile to note the following;

* Proposition 8 in California allowed a majority of voters to deny a minority the same right (to marriage) that the Minority already enjoyed.

Challenges to the constitutionality of Propopsition 8 have been made to the California Supreme Court. The case has gone to the US Supreme Court.

It should be noted that we have no formal written Constitution to protect the rights of minorities.

And if we have to challenge unjust Referendum results that attack the rights of minorities – who pays for the lawyers?

* Norm Withers referendum question contained many facets, all rolled into one statement,

That should there be an urgent reform of our Justice system to introduce restorative justice which seeks to place greater emphasis on the needs of victims and includes hard labour for all serious violent offences?

So did one vote for restorative justice? Or for “hard labour for all serious violent offences”? If one voted against “hard labour for all serious violent offences” – was one also voting against restorative justice and “the needs of victims”?

P.S. We are not “going down the binding referendum road” until this country is in such terrible shape the public demands systemic changes. That will likely come with Global Financial Crisis Stage 2. There will be demands for “strong leadership,” i.e., an invitation to a Kiwi Hitler. I want us to plan for democratic alternatives.

I agree that our economic crisis can create an environment where a persuasive leader can create a moral panic and the bring in crazy policies…but how do binding referendums help prevent this?
Don’t binding referendums just make it easier for people with resources and charm to push through policies? As in Colin Craig?

Most elected leaders are persuasive. It is the laws they pass that worry me.

– Create a super police data bank (Homeland Security). Have a referendum to vote it down.
– Give police unlimited powers to spy, search, detain, etc. Have a referendum to vote it down.
– Send 1,000 NZ military personal to join the Yanks in another ghastly Middle East war. Vote it down.
– Employment laws . . . assuming it is possible for them to get worse than they already are.
– Obliterate local government . . . too late. Already been done.

It is said that Hitler, Stalin, and Mao never violated their own country’s laws. They re-wrote the laws to make anything they did legal.

John Key is probably a darling person. But some of the laws he has passed are horrendous. I would like the public to have the option of vetoing some of those laws.

Binding referendums won’t guarantee a government won’t pass stupid, unjust laws. But referendums sure as hell improve the odds we can stop them. At present the population is powerless. That is immoral.

Binding referendums won’t guarantee a government won’t pass stupid, unjust laws. But referendums sure as hell improve the odds we can stop them. At present the population is powerless. That is immoral.

No, we vote for these policies every 3 years. We choose these idiots. The shit policies that Labour and National have brought has been fairly predictable to all of us. We voted Labour back in after we knew they were killing people for oil. We voted National back in after they told us they were gonna have a garage sale.
Kiwi’s vote without truly understanding the effects every 3 years. You want us to do it regularly.
Sorry, you have given me no reason to believe why referendums will help. Instead of having a persuasive prick deceive us every 3 years, we’ll just do it on a more regular basis.
Why do you think people will start voting with more logic?
Referendums in NZ right now will be handing over power and control to RWNJ’s.

by Rafael D. Quiles (gender-critical gay man from Puerto Rico) The writing on the wall is right in people’s faces and people just don’t see it or don’t want to. What could actually possess a heterosexual male to want to feminize himself and claim that he is a lesbian? Because ...

From the Wall Street Journal:Inside a room of the ornately decorated Hotel du Palais during last month’s Group of Seven summit in Biarritz, France, President Trump awaited a meeting with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi. Mr. Trump looked over a gathering of American and Egyptian officials and called out in ...

by the Redline blog collective At Redline we are very saddened to hear of the death of Magdalen Burns who passed away on the morning of Friday, September 13 (British time). Magdalen was a great fighter for the rights of women in general and lesbian women in particular, a defender ...

The Brexit issue has certainly brought with it a series of apparently difficult constitutional issues, many of them concerning the respective roles of the executive and parliament. Most of them arise because of the unwillingness of MPs, despite their professions to the contrary, to be bound by a constitutional rarity ...

. . This blogpost is different to my usual format of reporting on issues… Since July 1011, I have blogged on a variety of political issues; near always political and/or environmental; mostly highly critical of the previous National Government. Other issues included Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and repression of ...

Those close to the Police Minister believe the initiative may be the result of Nash “seeing a great deal” on AliExpress. In a move that comes seemingly out of nowhere, Police Minister Stuart Nash announced this afternoon that he expects all frontline staff to don bearskin hats, famously worn by ...

The government has released its Arms Legislation Bill, containing the second tranche of changes to gun laws following the March 15 massacre. And it all looks quite sensible: a national gun register, higher penalties for illegal possession and dealing, tighter restrictions on arms dealers and shooting clubs, and a shorter ...

Private prisons are a stain on humanity. Prison operators explicitly profit from human misery, then lobby for longer prisons terms so they can keep on profiting. And in the US, prison companies run not only local and state prisons, but also Donald Trump's immigration concentration camps. Faced with this moral ...

When National was in power, they were very keen on Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) - basicly, using private companies to finance public infrastructure as a way of hiding debt from the public. They were keen on using them for everything - roads, schools, hospitals. But as the UK shows, that "service" ...

Moving And Shaking: There was a time when people spoke matter-of-factly about the “labour movement” – a political phenomenon understood to embrace much more than the Labour Party. Included within the term’s definition was the whole trade union movement – many of whose members looked upon the Labour Party as ...

by Philip Ferguson Much of the left, even people who formally identify as marxists, have collapsed politically in the face of postmodern gender theory of the sort pioneered by American philosopher Judith Butler. For Butler even biological sex is socially constructed. “If the immutable character of sex is contested, perhaps ...

The media is reporting that the (alleged) Labour party sexual assaulter has resigned from their job at Parliament, which means hopefully he won't be turning up there making people feel unsafe in future. Good. But as with everything about this scandal, it just raises other questions. Most significantly: why the ...

By Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern I am every bit as angry as you are. I am every bit as disappointed as you must be. The people with power, oversight and the ability to do something about these processes within the Labour Party should be ashamed. Whoever those people are, I ...

Two-Faced? Labour insiders' commitment to the neoliberal status quo puts them at odds with their party’s membership; its trade union affiliates; and a majority of Labour voters, but this only serves to strengthen the perception they have of themselves as a special elite. Among the lesser breeds, they’ll talk up a ...

There has been a lot of talk about Boris Johnson wanting an election, and he has blustered with great gusto about 'chicken' Jeremy Corbyn refusing one, but I think there are many reasons why he is secretly glad he has been refused the opportunity:The Tories are an utter rabble,tearing themselves ...

Scottish appeal court judges have declared that Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend parliament in the run-up to the October Brexit deadline is unlawful. The three judges, chaired by Lord Carloway, Scotland’s most senior judge, overturned an earlier ruling that the courts did not have the powers to interfere in the prime ...

By Simon Bridges. The following is a press release from the office of Simon Bridges, leader of The National Party. Key ora, New Zealand. Happy Maori Language Week. Look, I’m writing to you today because I want to clear something up. There’s been a lot of kerfuffle around some things ...

I understand there's some stuff going round about how the SIS "was removed from the list of public offices covered by the Public Records Act in 2017". The context of course being their records derived from US torture, which will be disposed of or sealed. The good news is that ...

Dr. Christopher Labos and Jonathan Jarry discuss the recent Canadian fluoride/IQ research. They provide an expert analysis of the paper and its problems. Click on image to go to podcast. The critical debate about the recent ...

Australia is burning down again, and meanwhile its natural disaster minister is denying climate change:Australia’s minister responsible for drought and natural disasters, David Littleproud, has said that he doesn’t “know if climate change is manmade”. Clarifying earlier comments that the question is “irrelevant” when considering the Coalition government’s response to ...

Auckland Philippines Solidarity is excited to host Professor Judy Taguiwalo for a speaking tour of NZ in September. She is a well-known activist in the Philippines and was a political prisoner under the Marcos dictatorship. Professor Taguiwalo briefly served as a Cabinet member under President Duterte but was forced from ...

This open letter to the Green Party was penned after an opinion piece by Jill Abigail, a feminist and founding member of the party, was censored by the Greens’ leadership. (Redline has reprinted her article here).The intolerance of the Green Party leaders and their acceptance of the misogyny of gender ...

Today is a Member's day, and David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill continues its slow crawl through its committee stage. They're spending the whole day on it today, though the first hour is likely to be spent on voting left over from last time. After that they'll move on ...

An ambitious plan to fly to Los Angeles petered out into a brief sight-seeing trip and a desire to return home and get some sleep before work tomorrow. Air New Zealand has confirmed a flight to Los Angeles last night was turned back about a quarter of the way into ...

There appears to be consensus – by omission – that the concept of indigenous futures should be accepted at face value. So I scavenged the internet to see if I could locate an academic descriptor or a framework around how we think about it as a concept, and whether it ...

Here’s another novelty chocolate to shove in your gob, New Zealand Cadbury could be seeking to make itself great again with a rumoured new release: Pineapple Trumps, a spin on its classic chocolate-encased pineapple treat and do-it-yourself tooth remover. The global confectionery manufacturer and bumbling “before” character in an infomercial, ...

During my time in the Pentagon I had the privilege of sitting down with military leaders and defence and security officials from a variety of Latin American nations. Sometimes I was present as a subordinate assistant to a senior US defence department official, sometimes as part of a delegation that ...

Kia ora, Aotearoa. It’s that magical time of year. Te Wiki o te Reo Māori. In English, the week that frightens talk radio. As you probably know by now, all your favourite media outlets are participating, some more successfully than others. Stuff has changed its name to Puna for the ...

Eighteen months ago, the government promised to strengthen the Bill of Rights Act, by explicitly affirming the power of the courts to issue declarations of inconsistency and requiring Parliament to formally respond to them. So how's that going? I was curious, so I asked for all advice about the proposal. ...

As the Brexit saga staggers on, the focus is naturally enough on the Prime Minister and his attempts to achieve Brexit “do or die”. But the role played by the Leader of the Opposition is of almost equal interest and complexity. The first problem for Jeremy Corbyn is that he ...

Last week, English Prime Minister Boris Johnson boldly declared that he would rather die be dead in a ditch than delay Brexit. Unfortunately for him, the UK parliament accepted the challenge, and promptly dug one for him. The "rebellion bill" requires him to ask for and secure yet another temporary ...

Lost In Political Space: The most important takeaway from this latest Labour sexual assault scandal, which (if I may paraphrase Nixon’s White House counsel’s, John Dean’s, infamous description of Watergate) is “growing like a cancer” on the premiership, is the Labour Party organisation’s extraordinary professional paralysis in the face of ...

by Daphna Whitmore Every Sunday for the past two months unionists from First Union, with supporters from other unions, have set out to the Ihumatao land protest, put up gazebos and gas barbeques, and cooked food for a few hundred locals and supporters who have come from across the country. ...

Newsroom today has an excellent, in-depth article on pine trees as carbon sinks. The TL;DR is that pine is really good at soaking up carbon, but people prefer far-less efficient native forests instead. Which is understandable, but there's two problems: firstly, we've pissed about so long on this problem that ...

Canan Kaftancioglu is a Turkish politician and member of the opposition Republican People's Party (CHP). Like most modern politicians, she tweets, and uses the platform to criticise the Turkish government. She has criticised them over the death of a 14-year-old boy who was hit by a tear gas grenade during ...

Hi there, just call me Tim.We face tough problems, and I’d like to help, because there are solutions.An Auckand District Health Board member has nominated me for as a candidate for the ADHB, because her MS-related pain and fatigue is reduced with hemp products from Rotorua. Nothing else helped her. If I ...

The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security has published their report on whether the SIS and GCSB had any complicity in American torture. And its damning. The pull quote is this:The Inquiry found both agencies, but to a much greater degree, the NZSIS, received many intelligence reports obtained from detainees who, ...

Bewhiskered Cassandra? Professor Hugh White’s chilling suggestion, advanced to select collections of academic, military and diplomatic Kiwi experts over the course of the past week, is that the assumptions upon which Australia and New Zealand have built their foreign affairs and defence policies for practically their entire histories – are ...

For most of the time I was a British MP, my party was out of government – these were the Thatcher years, when it was hard for anyone else to get a look-in. As a front-bencher and shadow minister, I became familiar with the strategies required in a parliamentary democracy ...

by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh On August 29th a video in which veteran FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) commander Iván Márquez announced that they had taken up arms again was released. There was no delay in the reaction to it, from longtime Liberal Party figure and former president Uribe, for ...

Air New Zealand couldn’t believe its luck that this seemingly ideal piece of real estate had so far gone entirely unnoticed. Air New Zealand’s search for a site to build a second Auckland Airport may have made a breakthrough this afternoon, after employees scanning Google satellite imagery spotted a huge, ...

No-one on the anti-capitalist left in this country today puts forward a case that Labour is on the side of the working class. There are certainly people who call themselves ‘socialist’ who do, but they are essentially liberals with vested interests in Labourism – often for career reasons. Nevertheless, there ...

When National was in government and fucking over the poor for the benefit of the rich, foodbanks were a growth industry. And now Labour is in charge, nothing has changed: A huge demand for emergency food parcels means the Auckland City Mission is struggling to prepare for the impending arrival ...

Gayford, pictured here on The Project, before things got wildly out of control. A bold public relations move by the Government to encourage parents to vaccinate their children has gone horribly wrong. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern appeared on tonight’s episode of Three’s The Project, where the plan was for her ...

Mr. Whippy’s business model has driven it down a dark road of intimidation. Residents in major centres around the country are becoming disgruntled by the increasingly aggressive actions of purported ice cream company Mr. Whippy, who have taken to parking on people’s front lawns and doorsteps in a desperate attempt ...

Today the government released its Action Plan for Healthy Waterways, aimed at cleaning up our lakes and rivers. Its actually quite good. There will be protection for wetlands, better standards for swimming spots, a requirement for continuous improvement, and better standards for wastewater and stormwater. But most importantly, there's a ...

Today I appeared before the Environment Committee to give an oral submission on the Zero Carbon Bill. Over 1,500 people have asked to appear in person, so they've divided into subcommittees and are off touring the country, giving people a five minute slot each. The other submitters were a mixed ...

Anti-fluoride activists have some wealthy backers – they are erecting billboards misrepresenting the Canadian study on many New Zealand cities – and local authorities are ordering their removal because of their scaremongering. Many New Zealanders ...

So, those who “know best” have again done their worst. While constantly claiming to be the guardians of democracy and the constitution, and respecters of the 2016 referendum result, diehard Remainers (who have never brought themselves to believe that their advice could have been rejected) have striven might and main ...

Following publication of this article, the Ministry has requested it to be noted that this supplied image is not necessarily representative of what the final house will look like, and it “probably won’t be that nice.” As part of today’s long-anticipated reset of the Government’s flagship KiwiBuild policy, Housing Minister ...

Over the next week or two we will be running three synopses of parts of the opening chapter of John Smith’s Imperialism in the 21st Century (New York, Monthly Review Press, 2016). The synopsis and commentary below is written by Phil Duncan. Marx began Capital not with a sweeping historical ...

The State Services Commission and Ombudsman have released another batch of OIA statistics, covering the last six months. Request volumes are up, and the core public service is generally handling them within the legal timeframe, though this may be because they've learned to extend rather than just ignore things. And ...

In 1994, I was editing an ambitious street mag called Planet, from a fabled office at at 309 Karangahape Road. The thirteenth issue of the magazine was published in the winter of that year and its cover embodied a particularly ambitious goal: the end of cannabis prohibition.I wanted to do ...

KiwiBuild was one of the Ardern government's core policies. The government would end the housing crisis and make housing affordable again by building 100,000 new homes. Of course, it didn't work out like that: targets weren't met, the houses they did build were in the wrong place, and the whole ...

As the climate crisis escalates, it is now obvious that we need to radically decarbonise our economy. The good news is that its looking easy and profitable for the energy sector. Wind is already cheaper than fossil fuels, and now solar is too:The levellised cost of solar PV has fallen ...

A Crown Asset? For reasons relating to its own political convenience, the Crown pretends to believe that “No one owns the water.” To say otherwise would re-vivify the promises contained in the Treaty of Waitangi – most particularly those pertaining to the power of the chiefs and their proprietary rights ...

Most people would say, no doubt, that they have a pretty good idea of what money is. They live with the reality of money every day. It is what is needed to buy the necessities of life and to maintain a decent standard of living. You get money, they would ...

The article below was an opinion piece that appeared in the Spring 2019 issue of Te Awa (the NZ Green Party’s newsletter) and on the Greens website. In keeping with their policy of hostility to women defending women’s right to female-only spaces, Green bureaucrats have since removed the opinion piece. ...

Longer term readers may remember my complaining that, as a political scientist, it is burdensome to have non-political scientists wanting to engage me about politics. No layperson would think to approach an astrophysicist and lecture him/her on the finer details of quarks and black holes, but everybody with an opinion ...

Joining The Fight: Stevan Eldred-Grigg's argument for New Zealand staying out of the Second World War fails not only on the hard-headed grounds of preserving the country’s strategic and economic interests; and not just on the soft-hearted grounds of duty and loyalty to the nation that had given New Zealand ...

On September 27, School Strike 4 Climate will be striking for a future to pressure the government for meaningful climate action. This time, they've asked adults to join them. And now, Lincoln University and Victoria University of Wellington have signed on:Victoria University of Wellington has joined Lincoln University in endorsing ...

Another day, another constitutional outrage in the UK. This time, the government is saying that if parliament passes a law to stop Brexit before being prorogued, they may just ignore it:A senior cabinet minister has suggested Boris Johnson could defy legislation to prevent a no-deal Brexit if it is forced ...

Dum-de-doo. Children across New Zealand have known him for generations as the lovable giraffe who tells them to exercise, hydrate and not to shove lit cigarettes up their nostrils. But a world renowned giraffe expert says we shouldn’t be getting attached to Life Education’s Harold the Giraffe, as he is ...

By Mike Hosking. Yesterday morning, I waltzed into work, and as I walked past the drones aggressively typing out news on the computers I’ve repeatedly asked to be moved further away from, I caught a glimpse of the words “climate change”, and noticed that suspiciously they weren’t in condescending quotation ...

Share this:

Related

Share this:

Related

National's Deputy Leader Paula Bennett spent the week claiming a serious cover-up in the Prime Minister's office. She used parliamentary privilege to name three of the Prime Minister's closest advisors who, she says, knew about the sexual assault ...

“The Game Animal Council is concerned that the Government’s second tranche of firearms legislation released today may contain unreasonable provisions that will unfairly impact hunters,” says Game Animal Council Chair Don Hammond. ...

Government policy work on the Carbon Zero bill highlights connections between climate change, carbon sequestration and agriculture. Water quality and allocation are also topical with the release of the Draft Policy Statement for Freshwater Management ...

DairyNZ Chief Executive Dr Tim Mackle is welcoming this afternoon’s announcement that consultation on Essential Freshwater has been extended by two weeks - but is calling on the Minister to go further. ...

Immigration New Zealand could really benefit from an large investment of money, comments Ms June Ranson, chair of the New Zealand Association for Migration and Investment (NZAMI) , a leading voice in the immigration sector. “Instead of spending $25m ...

In recent times there has been no shortage of commentary regarding whistleblowers, with the proposed amendments to the Protected Disclosures Act 2000. These are aimed at strengthening the protection available to whistleblowers in New Zealand. That ...

Gun Control NZ strongly welcomes the comprehensive gun law reform bill and calls on all political parties to support it. Gun Control NZ encourages New Zealanders to let their MPs know they support this Bill, submit to the Select Committee, and ...

Federated Farmers agrees with most of the steps by government to protect people from illegal or irresponsible firearms use. But concerns about pest control and the effectiveness of a register remain. ...

Today at Parliament the NZ Drug Foundation released Taking control of cannabis: A model for responsible regulation, a new report that shows how we can take back control of cannabis from organised crime. ...

Smoking kills 5,000 Kiwis each year, so any government policies to help reduce smoking are a good thing. However, the current approaches are not working nor will the proposed limit on flavoured e-liquid that Associate Minister Salesa announced on the news ...

A petition, that promises a significant and dramatic improvement for the New Zealand economy, was handed to Dr Deborah Russell, the MP for New Lynn today. The petition, signed by over 5,000 New Zealanders addresses our crippling level of debt as well ...

The New Zealand Medical Association welcomes the announcement of an Initial Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission. We look forward to working with the newly appointed Chair Hayden Wano and the Commission. “It is vital that the steps to mental health ...

For anyone who even randomly follows the news will know that Hong Kong has been embroiled in demonstrations for months. These sometimes bloody demonstrations initially started as a result of a proposed Extradition Bill whereby there would be special ...

The release yesterday of Port Otago’s financial result for 2019, outlining a 12% increase and profits, including the news that the Chief Executive had received a $100,000 pay increase taking his remuneration to between $610,000-620,000, is like ...

“ I continue to be amazed at the incompetence of this Government when it comes to suicide prevention and mental health. Not only is this Government about to appoint a regional coroner who has a history of under reporting suicides amongst children ...

The Far North District Council (FNDC) and the Whangarei District Council (WDC) have lodged a joint appeal against the Northland Regional Council’s (NRC) omission of precautionary rules in its plan. [1] ...

The Chairman of the Authority, Judge Colin Doherty, has agreed to assist the Hong Kong Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) as a member of an international panel to provide high level advice to the IPCC in relation to its proposed "Thematic ...

“Putting families into motels is a temporary fix for desperate situations, rather than a sustainable solution to problems of poverty and homelessness,” says Scott Figenshow, Chief Executive of Community Housing Aotearoa. He was commenting on media ...

The New Zealand Psychological Society (NZPsS) says the current partial strike by 600 psychologists working in district health boards is a sign that temporary fixes to ongoing workforce shortages in the profession are not working. ...

New Zealand’s contribution to military operations in Malaya and Malaysia from the late 1940s to the mid-1960s will be commemorated in a national service held at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park at 11.00am on Monday 16 September. ...

The resignation of the President of the Labour Party over the sex pest allegations was inevitable. It was inevitable because of his appalling handling of the situation so far; and, because in situations like this where there has to be a “fall guy” ...

Yesterday Hon Grant Robertson Minister of Finance issued a welcome ‘clear directive’ in the press to ensure every Government considers the wellbeing of New Zealanders when creating future budgets . ...

The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa has written to Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters today urging that New Zealand condemn the Israeli Prime Minister’s planned annexation of vast tracts of the occupied West Bank of Palestine. ...

Today Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga New Zealand’s Māori Centre of Research Excellence (NPM) releases its next Te Arotahi paper calling on government to pay even closer attention to the issues of whānau and whakapapa within the criminal justice system. ...

“Technology adoption supports higher productivity growth, higher income growth and increased resources to pay for the things New Zealanders’ value. But the main problem facing New Zealand today isn’t too much technology, it’s not enough,” ...

Federated Farmers is asking nicely - please can the Government immediately extend the timeframe of the Essential Freshwater consultation so we can find a pathway forward that provides for both the health of the water, the health of people and the health ...

Youthline applauds the Government’s commitment to boosting mental health and addiction programmes and its intention to establish a Suicide Prevention Office but we urge swifter action in relation to implementing the programmes announced in the last budget ...

Share this:

Related

An Auckland mayoral candidate has broken the internet* by announcing a plan for a monorail around the central city. Who is Craig Lord, and is he serious? Alex Braae spoke to him shortly after his campaign launch to find out.The Spinoff local election coverage is made possible thanks to The SpinoffMembers. ...

Antibiotics are becoming increasingly less effective, so what treatments can we use when the drugs stop working? With help from plant extracts, award-winning company HerbScience is set to breathe new life into how we treat bacterial infections.When Cynthia Hunefeld was just 10 years old, her father was hospitalised with a ...

For some, it symbolises the very backbone of New Zealand’s food culture. But can Kiwi onion dip survive after the factory that makes reduced cream is shut down?The Australian factory that makes Nestlé reduced cream, an integral ingredient in Kiwi onion dip, is shutting down, casting a shadow over the ...

Every year Matariki X brings Māori innovators and entrepreneurs together to share their experiences and inspire one another. Callaghan Innovation’s Vinnie Campbell says the Māori economy’s biggest strengths have nothing to do with money.This story was funded by The Spinoff Members. For more about becoming a member and supporting The ...

Today marks the start of Covering Climate Now. To launch the week, the New Zealand climate change minister, James Shaw, writes an open letter to participants in the School Strike 4 Climate ahead of their day of action later this month.The Spinoff’s participation in Covering Climate Now is thanks to ...

National’s new agriculture spokesperson finds himself in one of the party’s most important portfolios, at a time of dramatically increasing tensions in the sector. Will Todd Muller, a man regularly mentioned as a future leader contender, find common ground?Todd Muller’s obsession with politics began with an American encyclopaedia, which his ...

Miss June’s Bad Luck Party was recorded literally between hospital shifts, and their summer schedule includes both festival dates and their frontwoman’s graduation from medical school. We sat down with the band to ask just how, exactly, they’ve survived so far.The first years of life for Tāmaki Makaurau pop-punk quartet ...

The following four short extracts are from A City Possessed: The Christchurch Child Crèche Case by Lynley Hood, which has just been reprinted by Otago University Press. The book was first published in 2001 and won the Montana Medal for Non-Fiction at the Montana New Zealand Book Awards. The controversial ...

Hamilton councillors have drawn headlines this year for being anti-science and insensitive to terror victims. At a mayoral debate on Wednesday, there were signs a campaign for change is gathering force.The Spinoff local election coverage is made possible thanks to The SpinoffMembers. For more about becoming a member and supporting The Spinoff’s journalism click ...

The Spinoff editor writes on the story that has engulfed NZ politics this week.One of the very few positive things to come out of a hideous week in New Zealand politics has been the sieving-out of the blinkered, partisan zealots. On one side, those who are ready to conjure up ...

In June 2018, Rawinia Higgins was appointed chairperson of Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori. She’s the first female and the first te reo Māori second-language speaker to hold the role, and during Te Wiki o te Reo Māori, she sat down with The Spinoff to talk about her ...

Compulsory New Zealand history in schools is an exciting opportunity but it’s crucial we’re critical of the stories we tell ourselves, writes Dr Aroha Harris. History is not simply an assemblage of facts and evidence. History is also the interrogation of those things.This may be unsettling news for some, including the ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh Breakey, Senior Research Fellow, Moral philosophy, Institute for Ethics, Governance & Law, Law Futures Centre, Griffith University Argument is everywhere. From the kitchen table to the boardroom to the highest echelons of power, we all use argument to persuade, investigate new ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alastair Blanshard, Paul Eliadis Chair of Classics and Ancient History Deputy Head of School, The University of Queensland Comedy often succeeds where tragedy fails. Fangirls, the pop musical which premiered on Thursday night in Brisbane, is not the first drama to explore ...

On the 10th anniversary of the infamous “Imma let you finish” episode, Josie Adams reflects on what this moment revealed about both Taylor Swift and Kanye West.Cast your mind back a decade: 2009 DJ Earworm was still good, Barack Obama was sworn in as president of the US, Israeli ground ...

Analysis - An astounding week in politics has left Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern carrying responsibility for sorting out the mess the Labour Party is in over the sexual assault allegation, writes Peter Wilson. ...

Police Minister Stuart Nash has confirmed details of a new bill that will create a registry of guns, and new offences and penalties for illegal manufacture, trafficking or changing markings of firearms. ...

Charli XCX has just released her latest album, Charli. The futuristic musician is always looking ahead, and so are her fans. We’ve paired each star sign with their perfect Charli XCX song.Charli XCX burst onto the scene in 2012, when she co-wrote and performed electro-pop headbanger ‘I Love It’ with ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benedict Sheehy, Associate professor, University of Canberra British health-care conglomerate Bupa runs more nursing homes in Australia than anyone else. We now know its record in meeting basic standards of care is also worse than any other provider. This is more than ...

Fable is best remembered for the disastrous, over-the-top promises made by its designer Peter Molyneux. But maybe, Adam Goodall argues, we’re remembering it all wrong.“There is something I have to say. And I have to say it because I love making games.” So opens an October 2004 post on the ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh Breakey, Senior Research Fellow, Moral philosophy, Institute for Ethics, Governance & Law, Law Futures Centre, Griffith University Argument is everywhere. From the kitchen table to the boardroom to the highest echelons of power, we all use argument to persuade, investigate new ...

The only published and available best-selling indie book chart in New Zealand is the top 10 sales list recorded every week at Unity Books’ stores in High St, Auckland, and Willis St, Wellington.AUCKLAND1 Native Son: The Writer’s Memoir by Witi Ihimaera (Penguin Random House, $40)Stand by for a review from ...

Tara Ward delved into Māori TV’s impressive OnDemand catalogue and found some of the best TV taonga for your viewing pleasure. From lifestyle shows to documentaries, from current affairs to reality TV, Māori TV has an abundance of quality telly that celebrates and acknowledges the people, places and cultures of ...

A new poem by London-based poet Morgan Bach.Turning, hurtlingI march diligently to sunshine in the parkeverything bathed and turning golden.A woman breathes fire by the folly framing herlike a personal door to hell. Conkers are pitched from high boughsto break and give up fruit, a spire emergent from the baring ...

Simon Day learns about the history and power of Chinese five-spice. Both the origins of Chinese five-spice and the flavour itself are a little mysterious. My internet investigations revealed the powder’s name could be in reference to the use of five spices (although this often grows to six or seven), or ...

Revelations around alleged sexual assault by a Labour staffer and the party inquiry into his behaviour have dominated the week. Alex Casey and Mihi Forbes join Gone By Lunchtime to survey the damage.Alex Casey, author of the Spinoff feature published on Monday, “A Labour volunteer alleged a violent sexual assault ...

In the fourth episode of Actually Interesting, The Spinoff’s monthly podcast exploring the effect AI has on our lives, Russell Brown speaks to Ana Arriola, general manager and partner at Microsoft AI and Research, about ethics and transparency in tech.Subscribe to Actually Interesting via iTunes or listen on the player below.To download this ...

Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.Today’s content by Dr Bryce Edwards.Labour Party sexual assault allegations Andrea Vance (Stuff): How to make the Labour abuse scandal ...

Toi Kai Rākau Iti, who is running in the Eastern Bay of Plenty Kohi Māori constituency, encounters an unlikely channel of youth engagement.In te ao Māori you’re always looking for tohu, or symbols. They guide you through uncertain territory and help you make sense of the world. The arrival of ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tomer Ventura, Senior Lecturer, School of Science and Engineering, University of the Sunshine Coast The creation of all-male or all-female groups of animals, known as monosex populations, has become a potentially useful approach in aquaculture and livestock rearing. Researchers and those in ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Holmes, Director, Climate Change Communication Research Hub, Monash University Predictably, both major political parties are resisting calls this week for a parliamentary conscience vote to declare a climate emergency in Australia. The resistance is unsurprising because both the Coalition and Labor ...

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Shi, Lecturer, Graduate School of Business and Law, RMIT University If the Religious Discrimination Bill passes into law, women may find it harder to get an abortion. That’s because health practitioners with an objection to performing the procedure on religious grounds ...